Atigun, I have no problem with lab testing and do not know what happened to the samples sent by Haimi. I also have no problem with his a priori conclusion Sobibor was a death camp before he excavated. In the same way I have no problem with archaeological work in Belgium of trenches and fortifications where the a priori belief is they were from WWI.

There is no doubt that WW I actually happened. Preceding events such as the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand by Gavril Princip are known and documented. Battles were fought in various locations, millions were killed and there are extensive graveyards full of dead soldiers with their names given. There are numerous photos and films of those events taken as they occurred. There are no comparable records or physical evidence for the holyhoax. Your attempt to equate the holyhoax with the reality of WW I is a bust, Nessie.

There is no doubt that WW I actually happened. Preceding events such as the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand by Gavril Princip are known and documented. Battles were fought in various locations, millions were killed and there are extensive graveyards full of dead soldiers with their names given. There are numerous photos and films of those events taken as they occurred. There are no comparable records or physical evidence for the holyhoax. Your attempt to equate the holyhoax with the reality of WW I is a bust, Nessie.

Seen that tactic elsewhere before:"Denying the Holocaust is like denying World War 2." The grasping for such BS should make one already suspicious. As this is just a rhetorical device to manipulate the gullible.

And indeed there is no problem finding and exposing the evidence for world war one, world war two or many of the previous wars. Some ancient wars are however in dispute in terms of them having happened or where they happened, what their nature was, etc. The dispute commonly takes place based on problematic records or archaeological evidence that is missing. Funny that in such cases nobody would seriously demand that the doubters ought to be jailed, lose their positions or movies being made vilifying them.

Hektor wrote:.....Seen that tactic elsewhere before:"Denying the Holocaust is like denying World War 2." The grasping for such BS should make one already suspicious. As this is just a rhetorical device to manipulate the gullible.

And indeed there is no problem finding and exposing the evidence for world war one, world war two or many of the previous wars. Some ancient wars are however in dispute in terms of them having happened or where they happened, what their nature was, etc. The dispute commonly takes place based on problematic records or archaeological evidence that is missing. Funny that in such cases nobody would seriously demand that the doubters ought to be jailed, lose their positions or movies being made vilifying them.

That is a misrepresentation of what I actually said. I specifically compared trenches in Belgium being assumed a priori to be from WWI and the fighting on the western front to the AR camps and how they are assumed to be a priori from WWII and the Nazi camp system where Jews were being imprisoned.

Hektor wrote:.....Seen that tactic elsewhere before:"Denying the Holocaust is like denying World War 2." The grasping for such BS should make one already suspicious. As this is just a rhetorical device to manipulate the gullible.

And indeed there is no problem finding and exposing the evidence for world war one, world war two or many of the previous wars. Some ancient wars are however in dispute in terms of them having happened or where they happened, what their nature was, etc. The dispute commonly takes place based on problematic records or archaeological evidence that is missing. Funny that in such cases nobody would seriously demand that the doubters ought to be jailed, lose their positions or movies being made vilifying them.

That is a misrepresentation of what I actually said. I specifically compared trenches in Belgium being assumed a priori to be from WWI and the fighting on the western front to the AR camps and how they are assumed to be a priori from WWII and the Nazi camp system where Jews were being imprisoned.

In that case Nessie you are misusing the phrase a priori.

'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

Hektor wrote:.....Seen that tactic elsewhere before:"Denying the Holocaust is like denying World War 2." The grasping for such BS should make one already suspicious. As this is just a rhetorical device to manipulate the gullible.

And indeed there is no problem finding and exposing the evidence for world war one, world war two or many of the previous wars. Some ancient wars are however in dispute in terms of them having happened or where they happened, what their nature was, etc. The dispute commonly takes place based on problematic records or archaeological evidence that is missing. Funny that in such cases nobody would seriously demand that the doubters ought to be jailed, lose their positions or movies being made vilifying them.

That is a misrepresentation of what I actually said. I specifically compared trenches in Belgium being assumed a priori to be from WWI and the fighting on the western front to the AR camps and how they are assumed to be a priori from WWII and the Nazi camp system where Jews were being imprisoned.

You don't have to assume this a priori. There is techniques that can date the age within historic frame. And a military trench can be distinguished from, for instance, a cable or water ditch. A military trench would have the remains of items like cartridges for example. There is other methods as well. Of course a gullible audience may not be aware that there are equivalents for this in the case of a concentration camp and just believe any factoid that his presented.

You can of course have one or more working hypothesis about a place, artifact or time frame. But you still need to prove it and absence of contradiction isn't a proof for anything.

"In spite of the evidence uncovered in the Winter 2013 season, a number of questions remain that can only be determined by further archaeological investigations. First of all, the extent of the damage created by work during the 1990s still needs to be studied. Most of the damage took place around Grave No. 4 and in the area of the crematoria. It is probable that artifacts were recovered here, which begs the question as to their whereabouts. The area between the mass graves and the gas chambers have yet to be investigated and our current state of knowledge suggests that more graves and crematoria have yet to be revealed. The actual location of the gas chambers requires verification. However, in order to carry this out it will be necessary to remove the asphalt over which monuments stand today. In addition, it is necessary to continue to expose the eastern fence in order to discover its connection to the structure in which the Jewish prisoners were held that was uncovered in Spring 2013."

"In spite of the evidence uncovered in the Winter 2013 season, a number of questions remain that can only be determined by further archaeological investigations. First of all, the extent of the damage created by work during the 1990s still needs to be studied. Most of the damage took place around Grave No. 4 and in the area of the crematoria. It is probable that artifacts were recovered here, which begs the question as to their whereabouts. The area between the mass graves and the gas chambers have yet to be investigated and our current state of knowledge suggests that more graves and crematoria have yet to be revealed. The actual location of the gas chambers requires verification. However, in order to carry this out it will be necessary to remove the asphalt over which monuments stand today. In addition, it is necessary to continue to expose the eastern fence in order to discover its connection to the structure in which the Jewish prisoners were held that was uncovered in Spring 2013."

So they are excavating, verifying and showing the world.

Nessie, in the report in second link that you provided, on page #7, there is a map showing the number and location of numerous alleged extant graves. How many separate grave sites do you see listed on that map?

Let's ask him again and see how many more times he's going to cravenly dodge these simple questions.

Q: Nessie, do you deny that Yoram Haimi claims to have legitimately uncovered 10 human skeletons during the excavation of 4 separate extant graves at Sobibor?

Nessie's answer: No.

Q: Nessie, has it ever been proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Yoram Haimi uncovered 10 human skeletons in 4 graves during his excavations at Sobibor?

Nessie's answer: Yes.

Questions Nessie is dodging:

Q: Nessie, are you aware of any other graves at Sobibor that Yoram Haimi excavated?

Nessie's answer: ?

Q: Nessie, according to the "backed by science" narrative, how many separate extant graves does Yoram Haimi claim to have proven currently exist at Sobibor?

Nessie's answer: ?

Q: Nessie, in the report in the second link that you provided, on page #7, there is a map showing the number and location of numerous alleged extant graves. How many separate grave sites do you see listed on that map?

Nessie's answer: ?

Nessie:

For CWhite, what I am aware of is the details regarding excavations as linked to. Why do you want me to go into those links, count graves and post the number for you?

You provided those links yourself for, as you yourself wrote: "To answer the thread title question." IOW, you provided those links as alleged proof that the information contained in them proves there have been excavations of mass graves at Sobibor that verifies the mass murder / burial claims and are in fact "showing the world," scientifically no less, that the orthodox version of the alleged Sobibor holocaust is true.

I'm about to prove that those claims, made by Haimi and espoused by you, are as fraudulent as the day is long.

That is if you have the courage, integrity and character to defend your so-called "evidence" that you claim exists in the links you provided.

You're not afraid of answering some simple questions in defense of you "evidence" are you Nessie?

Or are you going to tuck tail and run away from me like Roberto Muehlenkamp cravenly runs from Greg Gerdes?

Please note - that not one person who espouses the orthodox stories of these so-called “holocausts within the holocaust” and/or has fallen for the big “scientifically proven” lie, has ever mustered the courage / integrity / character to accept - The C.S.I. Challenge - and complete the following form. In fact, the very “scientists” involved in this criminal charade - like cornered rats - cravenly avoid these simple / relevent questions like the plauge. (What does that tell you?) Don’t forget - 4 out of the 75 so-called “huge mass graves” have actually been located / proven to exist and to currently contain human remains; so why won’t the self-deceiving true-believers invalidate the so-called “holocaust deniers” by proving the claims / allegations / insinuations made about the other 71? What are they so afraid of? (They’re terrified - because they know they have been forensically cornered - and by answering these questions, they’ll expose who the real deniers / liars are.)

You're not afraid of exposing who the real deniers / liars are, are you Nessie?

The display case recessed into the mound is filled with what appears to be pure human ash.

How can that be?1. The Germans supposedly made it a point to get rid of the remains at the Reinhard camps after the bodies were cremated.2. It's claimed that locals dug up the camp looking for valuables after the germans vacated.

So how could a pile of pure ash be on display?Did the germans decide to deviate from the gameplan after burning a pile of bodies and dump the ashes along with some bones back into one of the pits?A pit that the locals never dug into, ashes that never got mixed in with the soil as they were digging around?

Someone dug up a pile of ash to create that mound, that's what's implied.It obviously wouldn't have been left that way by the germans.So why can't Treblinka be dug up?